between panuku development auckland€¦ · the aup:op lighting rules under section e24.6.1 set...

IN THE MATTER of a direct referral application under section 87G of the Resource Management Act 1991 for resource consents for the necessary infrastructure and related activities associated with holding the America’s Cup in Auckland

BETWEEN PANUKU DEVELOPMENT AUCKLAND Applicant

ENV-AKL-2018-000078

AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Regulatory Authority

Date: 30th July 2018 Venue: Remote communication Facilitator: Not applicable Area of expertise: Lighting Experts in attendance:

Name For

John Mckensey Panuku Development Auckland

Glen Wright Auckland Council

JOINT WITNESS STATEMENT

1. Introduction

1.1. The purpose of expert conferencing is for expert witnesses to identify and reach

agreement with other expert witnesses within their field of expertise on the issues/matters on which the expert witnesses agree and the issues/matters on which they do not agree, including reasons for their disagreement.

1.2. In preparing this statement, the experts have read and understood the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses as included in the Environment Court Practice Note 2014.

General 2. Light Sensitive Areas

2.1. Matters of agreement

1303

The AUP:OP lighting rules under section E24.6.1 set limits for spill light (rule 6) and glare (rule 8) when experienced at a dwelling. They are silent with respect to such effects at locations other than those occupied by a dwelling.

Within the AUP:OP, visitor accommodation does not fit within the definition of a dwelling.

Therefore, rules 6 and 8 are not applicable to Visitor accommodation.

2.2. Matters of disagreement

None. 2.3. Comment

This matter arose from Mr Wright’s peer review report, wherein he proposed that visitor accommodation should be considered residential in nature and subject to the same lighting rules as dwellings. Mr Wright has reviewed the matter in conjunction with other members of Council’s team and has agreed that this is not the case.

3. AUP Lighting General Standard E24.6.1(6) – Spill Light

3.1. Matters of agreement The conditions currently indicate that only rule 6b applies and should be adjusted to enable the consent holder to apply either rule 6a or 6b of AUP:OP Section E24.6.1.


None.

3.3. Comment This matter arose from Mr Wright’s peer review report, wherein he proposed that only rule 6b (lighting effects at a window) should apply, negating the option of rule 6a (lighting effects at the boundary). Mr Wright has reviewed the matter in conjunction with other members of Council’s team and has agreed that the AUP:OP allows either of the two options to be used.

4. Illuminated Signage


The first paragraph of condition 202 should be amended to remove the words “, light projection and light effects”.


None.

4.3. Comment

The present wording of condition 202 includes elements which are not classified as signs, such as “light projection” and “light effects”.

1304

Event Lighting

5. Event lighting curfew times


The event lighting curfew times as they relate to the AUP Lighting General Standards E24.6.1(5), should be the same as the curfew times agreed for noise. Condition 183K g) should be amended accordingly.


None.

5.3. Comment The event generating noise at night will need lighting enabled to the lighting pre-curfew limits for the same time duration. Hence, the pre-curfew lighting effects time limit should be adjusted to align with the time limits set for pre-curfew noise effects for events.

6. Event lighting design


Consent condition 183K b) should be adjusted to read; “Setting design principles and establishing a monitoring regime for the event lighting installation to ensure compliance with the E24.6.1 General Standards in the AUP:OP and to minimise obtrusive lighting effects to the light sensitive areas and visitor accommodation.”


None.

6.3. Comment Temporary event lighting includes theatrical lighting typically with moving light effects, colour, animation and varying lighting intensity. It is positioned manually on temporary structures and manually aimed to achieve artistic effects. This makes precise design calculations in advance of the installation impractical. The traditional approach comprises selection and positioning of luminaires based upon the lighting technician’s experience and aiming to suit the needs of the event. The Event Lighting Management Plan (LMP) will set out the design and installation principles including a requirement to minimise obtrusive environmental light effects.

7. Event lighting pre-event checks


Consent condition 183K d) should be replaced with the following wording;

1305

“A requirement to undertake a walkover of the surrounding environment, prior to the event with the lighting energised, to ensure that the installation satisfies condition 183K b).”


None.

7.3. Comment None.

8. Event big screens


Consent condition 183K h) should be added; “Positioning or control of big screens to minimise obtrusive light effects. Ideally, direct away from light sensitive areas and visitor accommodation where practical. Tilt the screen down slightly to reduce the maximum luminance projected toward observers in multi-storey residential or visitor accommodation buildings.”


None.

8.3. Comment It is impractical to attempt dimming of video content. However, this condition will provide an appropriate degree of environmental protection.

Construction Lighting

9. Luminaire types


Condition 113 a) should be amended to read as follows; “Construction lighting poles and luminaires that either project light forward and sideways with zero or minimal tilt, or are aimed away from residential and visitor accommodation locations.”


None.

9.3. Comment Either approach can be used to achieve compliance with the AUP:OP lighting general standards in section E24.6.1.

1306

10. Lighting design


Condition 113 d) should be amended to delete “, including rule E24.6.1(6)(b)”.

10.2. Matters of disagreement None.

10.3. Comment This will provide consistency with item 3 of this Joint Witness Statement.

BAU Lighting

11. Lighting design


Condition 203 d) should be amended to delete “including rule E24.6.1(6)(b)”.

11.2. Matters of disagreement None.

11.3. Comment This will provide consistency with item 3 of this Joint Witness Statement.

Mediation

12. Mediation lighting concerns


The following concerns were raised during mediation in relation to condition 183K. They have been addressed in the foregoing items in this Joint Witness Statement;

a. Condition 183K a) - Light sensitive areas includes residential and visitor accommodation.

b. Focus / spot lights an issue for Princes Wharf. c. Layout is to avoid, or minimise effects on light sensitive areas. d. Location / orientation (item v) to take into account light sensitive areas. e. Timing (10pm shut down) – opportunity to capture possibility of shutting down

earlier? Reflect close time of particular event with buffer for people to vacate area.

f. Seeking application of Council standards for dimming screens at night. g. Number of LED screens needs to be considered in context of human

enjoyment of natural space.


None.

1307

12.3. Comment

The JWS items addressing these matters are as follows;

a. Item 2

b. Item 6 c. Item 6 d. Item 6 e. Item 5 f. Item 8 g. This is a matter for the planners to consider.

Dated the 30th day of July 2018

John Mckensey

Glen Wright

1308

between panuku development auckland€¦ · the aup:op lighting rules under section e24.6.1 set...

Documents